EDIT: Everybody is taking this WAY TOO SERIOUSLY. It's mean to be a shot at the misogyny of reddit, in the same tone as that misogyny. This would be what reddit would be like if all the misogynistic statements about women we see everyday in the comments were about men instead of women (with a few grains of truth, like diapers really are that expensive). SEE WHAT I DID THERE? Oh, I guess you guys didn't. But that's probably my fault.

EDIT #2: If I had known this was gonna end up on the front page of 2XC, I would have spent more time on it. Sincerest apologies!! Hopefully the people who think it's mildly amusing outweighs those who want me to crawl into a chimney and die. (On that note, anyone want to watch Gremlins with me?)

Reading all the posts today about reddit's misogyny really got me thinking. All these guys who blabber on and on about how women only want to take guys' money, or how marriage is just legalized prostitution, are full of shit.

I don't want your fucking money. I don't want your caveats. I don't want to feel pressured to do ANYTHING for you just because you bought me dinner or a drink. I don't want you forking over all the money to raise the kids. I don't want to be on a fucking allowance. I don't want you holding that shit over my head.

Oh, and guess what? Not only do I not want it. I DON'T NEED IT. Mama didn't raise no fool. Mama raised a tough bitch with a loaded CV who probably makes more money than you do. As the great Gloria said, Women need men like fish need bicycles. Especially when the bicycles insist on acting like such tools when it comes to fishes.

Oh, and also, I'M NOT TRYING TO TRICK YOU BY GETTING PREGNANT. The fact that half the posts on the front page of 2X are about birth control attest to the fact that MOST OF US DO NOT WANT TEH BABIES RIGHT NOW. Also, if you're the kind of person who thinks women "trick" men into marriage by getting pregnant, I DO NOT WANT TO BEAR YOUR CHILD OR LEGALLY BIND MYSELF TO SUCH DOUCHEBAGGERY. Also, children are not a tool by which we scary ladies accomplish the previously discussed task of wealth acquirement. Child support doesn't go towards a wicked manicure habit, it goes towards simulac and diapers. Do you even know how much a onesie costs? A FUCKING LOT.

That being said if you are a nice, respectful boy, I will be more than glad to jump your bones and possibly cook you delicious nom nom's because I'm cool like that. But you have to do the dishes, because I don't want to fuck up my manicure.

You don't want X != women don't want. Just as much as "My last girlfriend X" != "Women X".

But that's just a minor squibble. Otherwise hell yeah. I've never bought somebody dinner or even a drink. Always seemed stupid to me. Doesn't flirting like that just lead to filtering to the women who like that stuff, hence creating a self fulfilling prophecy?

I said some guys have the guts to get the girls and the money, and other guys don't see the guts as the cause, they only see the money and girls correlation and then assume incorrectly that money is the cause and girls are the effect.

I don't see why a man with guts should choose between money and girls when he can get both, and I never tried to imply that he should choose in my comment above.

Every dude who says that all women are just out for the money rightfully deserves some harsh words, but saying that there is a certain amount of women who do value money is, I feel, not misogyny just like it is not misandry to say that there are a certain amount of men who are douchebags or creeps.

For one, if I remember correctly, OKcupid showed clearly that the more money a guy makes, the more replies he can expect while the same correlation didn't exist for women.

Men who earn a lot of money most likely possess these other traits: Confidence, relatively intelligent, responsible, ambitious, well-spoken... All very attractive qualities. Yes, money and perceived attractiveness correlate but that doesn't mean one should assume that women find money extremely attractive. Wealth is evident of other attractive characteristics that a woman might be looking for.

this is such a good point. when i met my husband he was broke as hell living in one of the shittiest run down tragic apartments i've ever been in. and he had this haircut. but he was confident, intelligent, fun to talk to, etc... full of awesome!

it's like somebody crossed an eagle scout, a ninja, and Han Solo. in fact, he's so awesome, i have trouble not giving him blow jobs.

I'm curious because I've dated 3 different guys with ponytails and all 3 cut them off once things started going well steadily. I kind of have a weird pride thing about it, especially because i NEVER say anything about their hair. they just get to that point where they feel good/confident enough to let the ugly hair cuts go.

For me it's that with every guy I've dated who didn't have a sustainable income, I've ended up spending a lot of money on them and I don't really want to have to do that every time we go somewhere.

For instance, if I want to go out for drinks with friends and my partner wants to come with me, while I don't mind buying them the occasional drink - buying all of their drinks can add up to $70 or more. That's a $140 night all of a sudden.

If I'm dating someone, I want them to be financially independent. Otherwise, I just become gradually resentful of my relationship with them.

Not going to argue with you - but I also wonder about the correlation between income and intelligence. I'm willing to bet the smarter you are, the more money you tend to make. And the less money you make, the less intelligent you are - or at the very least, the less you care about proper spelling and grammar, etc.

Now, I will very much have to disagree with you on the first point. Many smart people make little to no money (even famous ones - see most writers, poets, etc.). I was also reading an article (sorry, source lacking - I'm a bad person) which said that the reason the very rich get that way is not usually mainly about talent but because of 'Russian Roulette'. The idea is that if you gave a million people a dollar for every time they played a game of Russian Roulette you'd get to a point where you'd have some people who'd make it quite a long ways and would wind up very rich. It wasn't talent that saved them, just randomness.
Randomness aside, I do not think that intelligence equals money. Many smart people don't seek money (take professors for example) and many aren't given the chance to seek money (take disadvantaged people).
Edit: Thanks juntaklaus. That is much more scientifically put than the way I put it.

So tell me, exactly what does that phrase mean in this context? That there's another reason why reported income is correlated with interest? Because it seems to me that the most likely explanation is in fact that people prefer to go out with someone who's making lots of money.

It means that there's a correlation between high income and getting lots of replies (meaning, that they both tend to occur in the same people, on OKCupid), but that doesn't necessitate that one causes the other.

It means: Throw these two sets of data together and you get a graph that says that they are related to some degree.

But the interpretation can be wide open. I can still mean that rich men just happen to be handsome or smart or whatever. Theoretically it could also mean that receiving messages makes you rich but you can discount that one quickly. Lastly it can still mean that women like the social status that "over 100.000" comes with.

The reality is, most of the things that help you get money, also help you get girls:
being confident, outspoken, taking risks, etc.
Most guys only see the correlation.

I've been on Okcupid, and the guys that make money are also the smart, witty guys with confidence. I'd also like to add another correlation that probably goes with the well-educated man. Most of them don't still live at home. I don't know about you, but I find living in your childhood bedroom at age 29, a turn off.

being put down for not having a bunch of money to show off is not really good for one's sense of confidence. i have the capability to make a lot of money, but i hate the work i'd have to do to be rich. i'm smarter and more witty than most people. and i've been ridiculed by women for not having money. it's not really helping my confidence, let me tell you.

If you don't want to do the work that would give you a "comfortable" existence, then perhaps you're lazy, or on a completely different wavelength to the women you meet, in regards to what is necessary for a happy and successful life.

Or maybe the women you meet are gold-diggers. Either way, you wouldn't be happy with them anyway. Hang out with hippies or hipsters/geeks more?

i'm in a relationship. but was pretty unsocialized until my early 20s, and i still was pretty damaged by dumb girls treating me like crap because i'm not rich. i know it's just dumb girls and not everybody. but every time a man has a complaint about how women (a generalization) treat him, everybody points out that it's a small portion of the population.

i'm going to start saying that when people talk about abuse, rape and pay discrimination. funny, though, i just realized yesterday that i have been raped by three of my girlfriends. one of them is a feminist activist, and the other one is my current girlfriend. i know that neither of them intended to.

When you have a grab bag of men to choose from and you know next to nothing about them, does it really come as a shock that women are going to use things like looks and money to choose who they reply to?

Women get messaged a lot more than men on OkCupid. Of course they are going to be more picky. They can afford to be.

May wanna rethink the reddit your posting to if the "these guys" guys are your target audience, for the most part this isn't the forum they frequent (tbh outside /r/mensrights/ I'm not sure anyone with such extreme views even exist?) "/

That said:

Women need men like fish need bicycles.

Is a stupid quote, Women need men/other women/a combination just as much as men need women/other men/a combination. People need other people - money has nothing to do with that - trying to pretend otherwise is stupid IMO.

Also, way to perpetuate the stereotype that all men just want to have sex... ever considered that just because your a women doesn't magically mean that all men want to sleep with you... >.< Being against guys who are sexist idiots doesn't require you being just as sexist back... </my own little rant>

tbh outside /r/mensrights/ I'm not sure anyone with such extreme views even exist?

You clearly don't get out much. It's posted everywhere from askReddit to the trolls right here in 2x; anything that involves a male-female interpersonal relationship (or lack thereof) always end in woman bashing. Always. If you are a male poster you should "get out while you can! Your girlfriend is a money-mongering slutbag who is only using you to get pregnant and trap you into a marriage." Part and parcel the exact answer given every time. You could be posting about what to get your girlfriend for Christmas and a good portion of redditors wiuld still be encouraging you to dump your girlfriend. If you are a female poster with a problem? Forget about it. Post to 2x, because your lady problems don't belong on the rest of reddit. Your assertion that this shit only happens in r/mensrights is horrifyingly myopic.

Your assertion that this shit only happens in r/mensrights is horrifyingly myopic.

And your lazy generalization about how any post on Reddit "that involves a male-female interpersonal relationship (or lack thereof) always end in woman bashing" is horrifically biased. Have you bothered to read the posts done by women where the thread degenerates into a session on (rightfully) slamming the male member of the relationship? They happen just as often.

2XC is a great place, but not when vitriol's being spewed in the face of logic. See what I did there? I didn't say "all posts by aggressive feminists in 2XC are pregnant with exaggeration and straw men setups" because not all of them are. Not even most of them. In fact, today, the only one I've seen is this post (and this comment that I'm responding to) even if it is a lousy attempt at satire. But hey, it's tough to be specific, and so much more dramatic and attention-getting to be broad.

Well for one, we've got a post two levels above that says that every(he or she even made sure to write "always" twice) single discussion on reddit that involves women will turn into women-bashing which would mean that the overwhelming majority of reddit users (actually just the men) are sexist and hate women.

I have read those posts, but they really only happen in one place: 2x. I have yet to see any example of that sort of post being allowed to progress that far anywhere else on reddit. I'm willing to allow that male-bashing occurs here in 2x; I don't think that's up for debate. I am saying that if you are a woman on reddit and you want to have a less-than-positive conversation about your husband/boyfriend/men/whatever the only place you won't get downvoted into the ground or buried under misogynist comments is 2x. If you are a man, you can go anywhere to any other subreddit and post anything you like about their girlfriend/wife/sluts/women who are sexually uninterested in you/whatever and get a circle jerk of upvoting glory bashing the woman in question, or women in general until you're blue in the face. It isn't just r/mensrights where men on reddit get militantly misogynistic, and that was my point.

I am saying that if you are a woman on reddit and you want to have a less-than-positive conversation about your husband/boyfriend/men/whatever the only place you won't get downvoted into the ground or buried under misogynist comments is 2x.

No. r/Relationships, for example, is not nearly the woman-bashing cesspool you make it out to be. No one's talking about r/mensrights, by the way--THAT place IS a cesspool, and again with the straw man arguments?

You talk about getting blue in the face--that's how I feel in some of the 2XC threads; comment on the logically-flawed aspects of posts, get attacked by overly-aggressive feminists.

I also want to say that 2X is definitely NOT the best place to get objective advice on relationships either, and I cite perspectives such as yours as the reason; logic and evidence should always trump baseless exaggeration and the pushing of talking points.

I have yet to see any example of that sort of post being allowed to progress that far anywhere else on reddit.

and why is this? my observation is that since reddit is largely male, guys just downvoting shit that they don't care to read at the moment does a pretty good job of curbing men bashing. most of the ladybashing gets downvoted, but since it's not directed at the majority of the population, it takes longer.

I'm not sure if I missed the sarcasm there or something but I wonder why this is upvoted...

Just recently a guy explained how he found out that his GF slept with >50 men and it bothered him. Now if your statement were true, reddit should scream with one unified voice: "drop that slut!". Instead reddit told him to get over it.

I like this quote. The thing is, one person should not NEED another in order to survive, in order to live, to be defined as a person or to realize value in their identity or actions. It's unhealthy, and often, an expectation that both women and men have of women in relation to man. Look at how often a woman is defined by her man: her last name, "Mr. and Mrs. James Smith," pastor's wife, officer's wife.

Is life better in a partnership? Of course! Can a man bring out the best in a woman, just as a woman can bring out the best in a man? Of course! Those are good and healthy things.

But a woman does not need a man to survive, to exist as a person. And that is why I like that quote.

Don't we all need human interaction? I know I need affection and love and conversation. I fill that need with a man (my boyfriend). I'm not saying women "need" men to provide for them, I'm saying people need other people to survive - we are a social species and the vast majority of people would go totally insane without that interaction. And yes, some of it can be filled with friends and family, and some people do fine like that, but pretending that there isn't a part of you that needs the love, affection, sex, etc... that comes from being paired is silly to me.

Why can't it be "people need mates like fish need bicycles"? Surely you can see how "men need women like fish need bicycles" feels offensive because it seems to imply that maybe women still do need men. As a guy I feel obligated to pay for my privelege by supporting totally equality between men and women, but this sort of thing makes me feel like the tone isn't that everyone should be equal, but that women should have their turn being superior.

I think that's a very good point and gets to some of the intrinsic problems with that "fish-bicycle" approach to feminism in general. The idea that women need "a turn on top" has never done anything but hurt people, and reconfirm the old social layering by simply trying to replace one -archy with another.

Uh, no, she asserts she's speaking on behalf of "womenfolk" in the tl;dr. She's also going on and on about how women aren't like this or women are like this as if she's representing all women. So, yes, she is.

She started with first person singular, and as her tirade went on she switched to a united "We" usage and ended with her TL;DR claiming that "womenfolk just want your penis." Certainly seemed to me she was trying to make blanket observations.

unfortunately this is often not true. as a child of divorced parents and as someone who knows a few people who are divorced, i have a good idea where 'child support' and 'alimony' goes.

a good friend of mine has a kid in college. he was giving his divorced wife $$ to help pay for the kids education. that money was spent by her on everything but college. my friend had to have a serious talk with his kid to tell him about when and how much money was given to the mother. it was a moment of enlightenment for the kid.

No it isn't "often untrue." You only hear about the bad mommies on the news or use your own anecdotal evidence to pass judgement on single moms. It sucks that you've seen a few bad examples out there, but that hardly speaks for other hard-working single moms who basically live for their children. I know plenty of colleagues and friends raised by single moms-- many without the help of alimony or child support, because their deadbeat fathers pissed the money away somewhere else and no court would enforce the child support. Those women are the ones who should be getting your attention.

Ditto. I'm sure my mom spent more on me than my Dad payed in child support. He always payed (he's awesome), but she'd just rather spend money on anything her kids want than anything she wants (she's also awesome.)

Yet speak volumes statistically, for every doting parent who pours the entire payment and then a huge chunk of personal money into caring for the child there is an asshole who blows it all on stupid shit.

A good portion of this problem is due to the fact that child support is often not based on any sort of empirical standard of how much a child costs to rear, but is instead calculated off a parents income, resulting in cases where one kid gets $300 a month and it's not enough to get by, and another kid gets $2000 and there's a giant chunk of pocket change for the custodial parent, system's fucked up.

Tell my girlfriend that. She makes 25% more than my top salary ever (and even more than my salary now) and she's constantly saying how she can't go shopping for clothes, etc., until I make more money. (She makes six figures.) And how the "#1 thing that gives me safety in a relationship is money, or the lack of me worrying about money."

She is a wonderful person and gives to charity and is sweet and loving, perhaps the most frugal person I know and she has no debt, but she gets freaked out about money. Irrationally, I think... not that I can say "hey honey you're irrational" without her getting defensive and hurt... but nonetheless, it is the biggest problem in our relationship, that she makes more money than I do. (And we don't need more money, but she feels that we both need six-figure salaries.)

And while I'd consider this the one flaw on her part (whereas I have many flaws) it's not like I want to (or should) break up with her for this one thing.

Oh I don't. My girlfriend makes me much happier than any girlfriend I've ever have... I am MUCH more comfortable in the relationship... except on this one issue, which at times seems to supplant all others.

Are you guys living together? Sharing expenses? If she makes more, do you guys split the bills 50-50 or does she pay more? Just because she's making 6 figures doesn't mean it's irrational to be cautious about money. Maybe she grew up poor. Maybe she's reacting to the shite economy out there. If she's like me, she covers most of the cost of grocery, rent, utilities, vacations, etc because of the salary differentials. I make close to 6 figures, but I worry about money constantly because if my salary goes away (which is possible in this job market), we're going to have some very tough times ahead. So maybe she'd rather feel more financially secure where you contribute more to the relationship pot before she splurges. Or you can just think she's after your money.

I don't think the poster meant to imply that he thinks she's after his money, more that his girlfriend definitely, and obviously, places a lot of value in money and also in his making money - even to the extent that perhaps if he were making less money, she wouldn't be interested, because after all money makes her feel secure. Why would she date someone she's not secure with? He conveys a deeper understanding of the issue than that he "just think[s] she's after [his] money."

And then he goes "Tell my girlfriend that". You said "Why would she date someone she's not secure with?" This precisely devolves down into him thinking she's after his money, in the sense that he thinks if he doesn't make at least x amount, she will leave him -- as you point out. So he may not be thinking of her in the traditional gold digger sense (which would be he's already making y amount and needs to maintain it), but there is an aspect of how he's considering her that views her as a gold digger.

The fact that he thinks it's irrational for her to be worried about money because they're comfortable now and she's frugal and has no debt is a little alarming. She may be in no debt BECAUSE she's frugal and worries about money and doesn't go shopping for clothes. If she changed her habits, maybe she would no longer have no debt. But instead he just views it as a problem.

And financial considerations are obviously a huge part of a successful relationship -- both parties have to agree or come to an understanding on how the mutual pool of resources will be allocated. Does he ever ask her why it's so important to her that they both increase their salaries and that she have financial stability? Does he ever wonder whether she wonders when to start saving for kids, for a house, for retirement, for that rainy day? Nowadays, you have to start saving for a kid's college education before he/she is even born. Maybe she's been dipping into savings in order to cover the differences in salaries when it comes down to paying for bills and groceries since it's now for two instead of one. Did she grow up poor? Does he try and understand where she's coming from? He says that she gets defensive when he brings up that he thinks she worries about money too often. Does he get defensive when she says she worries about money? All I was trying to do was highlight some of the things that could be affecting the way she views money that would be hopefully more helpful than simply viewing the whole behavior as "irrational".

so you're the perfect woman. you honestly think the stereotype you try to fight is unrealistic? there are women out there who do crave financial security and don't have any because they're not well-paid like you. there are a lot of women out there who DO trick guys into making a commitment (they otherwise wouldn't) - by getting pregnant on purpose and against the man's will, while pretending to be the equally surprised victim of some accident and tell him they can't kill unborn life for bullshit ethical reasons or something. this stuff DOES happen! and somewhere out there it's happening right now!

if your point is that not all women fall into the category of batshit insane, passive-aggressive stalkers then i get it, but i already knew that. honestly, it sounds like you're having some unrealistic concepts about men more than anything else.

methinks you simply don't give a shit and didn't even attempt to get my message. or else you would have had something to respond, other than dismissing my opinion without referring to any point in particular.

Listen, asshole, read all the other comments. I got a bunch of shit from every other self-righteous douche bag who must jump on people when they're wrong on the internet. I get it, you don't like it, I fucking get it, but if you honestly think those are the views I hole you're fucking ridiculous.

Now I have to go get my programming done, because I have better shit to do that sit there and deeply analyze your point. It's not Das Kapital, it's an internet comment, just like my little post isn't The Protestant Work Ethic, it's THE INTERNET.

if you honestly think those are the views I hole you're fucking ridiculous.

i don't care if they are the views that you hold, they're the views that you WROTE ABOUT FOR OTHERS TO COMMENT ON. if you have a problem with the majority of responses - why don't you just delete your poorly elaborated post?

nothing just "matters" on its own, there has to be someone it matters to. the same thing can matter to one person, and not interest another. most things in the world are that way, why not your opinion?

part of your opinion is that i should put effort into reading literally

all the other comments

before replying to the post. and the fact that i didn't do so makes me an "asshole". at the same time you won't even properly think about my comments before replying to them, after all you have

better shit to do that sit there and deeply analyze your point

talking about double standards, that seems like one. i took a considerable amount of time to read your OP and think about it before posting. i care about this topic. you on the other hand don't seem too interested in equality, more like someone who just needed to live out some aggression by posting a feelgood essay about how great they are and how moronic another party is to not assume so from the start.

Yet again you failed to make any actual point apart from analysing my behaviour. I'm not "mad" about anything and haven't been mad in the context of this conversation at any point. I kind of assumed you were when you called me an asshole though. Where I'm from civilized people typically don't fall back to insults unless they're severly caught off guard, because insults aren't contructive in any way. By civilized I mean the minority of intelligent, open-minded people. If your creativity ends at trying to guess personal weaknesses of any person with a differing opinion then I don't see why you should bother responding at all.

Again, it's a joke. I don't actually believe that women are bicycle-less fish. (Although if you think about it, it's nice to WANT a man instead of NEED him, especially if that NEED is based off of money.)

Regarding first paragraph, again, go to the post (I'll try and find it) about the placard in the men's restroom of a jewelry store. Literally every comment called marriage "legalized prostitution," or "a waste of money." It's not from personal experience, I'm too young and stupid to be married right now.

I didn't so much see the post as aggressive, as hyperbolic and kind of funny, like a big troll. I'm too young to be bitter, but I have seen a lot of this bullshit on reddit, and I think it kind of shows how stupid it is when a women says this kind of stuff, and gets jumped on, but a man says this kind of stuff every day in a lot of posts and no one bats an eye.

So it was a joke, but it seems like I'm not the only one to have misinterpreted it judging by the comments here.
I'm just tired of this old debate. It seems like everyday on TwoX there's a new post saying "oh no, a boy was rude to me and said really really bad things, life is so unfair blablabla"

There are so many other more important problems in the world going on right now that it pisses me off that so many intelligent people waste their time on semantics and false-problems.
I've been here for almost a year and not once have I felt hurt or attacked just because I was a girl. Of course you get the trolls but you learn to disregard them, they're just crying for attention.

As I said before, the real men, the ones that are worthy of having debates with, don't think in those terms. Therefore, in my mind that joke was just a waste of breath and directed at a deaf audience.

If you think there's a misogyny problem on reddit, is this the way you're going to tackle it? By telling jokes?

I know this response is all over the place and I know you weren't expecting this reaction from us so sorry.

Haha, I expected some people to react like this, I mean, I'm not new to feminism. I just think it's sad that feminist feel the need to critique it in that way. I'm a young feminist (but raised by feminists, hence not new) and the amount of shit I get even in daily life is amazing. No jokes, no saying the word bitch, no being shameless about sex. It doesn't come from my parents (who should be the ones reprimanding me for being so shameless, I guess) it comes from older feminists. What happened to sisterhood? Just like you say there are bigger fish to fry, why do some people feel the need to comment on this in such a condescending or patronizing way, instead of say, dealing with a bigger issue?

I didn't aim to "tackle" anything. There were already a few posts yesterday with people having really sensible discussions about misogyny on reddit, and I kind of wanted to show how ridiculous it all is. And the comments on this rant from men show that there is real misogyny in this community. I don't know if it's the subreddits I read (I don't spend too much time at 2XC) but it's all over the place, like ENTIRE threads of this shit.

I love it. That is my new motto. I dont want you money I want your penis.
I get so mad at the idea that we are all basically prositutes after mens money. Ugh . I couldn;t care less about your cash buddy.
I am glad to see other ladies out there still feel this way.

There are plenty of women who do want money and to be "taken care of." Do I assume a new woman is like that and risk driving away a truly good woman, or do I assume a new woman is not like that and risk getting burned? Ah, life's great mysteries...

Unfortunately there are women out there who just want money and who do get preggo on purpose and do all the negative things you posted. Thankfully they are the minority, but the horror stories are what tend to stick in memory lol.

You don't see many guys talking about how their GF got pregnant and busted her ass to get a great paying job with benefits before the baby was born so he wouldn't have to support them.

Very true. The negative always sticks out. It's the inability to seperate that negative from the majority that frigtens me. Like, I know not all men are like this, that's why the post is ironic (at at least attempted to be funny but people didn't really get it). I don't understand how I can go on reddit and be like FUCK GUYS SAY STUPID SHIT, and then be like 'oh yes but my boyfriend (and most guys) are amazing!" but this lack of awareness can be spewed and supported every day in the comments.

A haha, I'm perfectly calm, it's faux-rage. It's a faux-rage rant. And Wombat (below) has it right. I'm not attacking men, I'm just sort of showing how stupid and idiotic it is to blather on about these power dynamics like so many of the douchholes in the comments do about women.

Mama raised a tough bitch with a loaded CV who probably makes more money than you do.

I was raised to be a respectful woman who values education and knows that the dollar signs are not the end-all be-all.

Women need men like fish need bicycles

This statement is just plain idiotic. Having a partner in life fulfills many emotional and physical needs. Need a man to survive? No. But does having a partner to go through both difficult and wonderful times make a difference? Yes.

I'M NOT TRYING TO TRICK YOU BY GETTING PREGNANT.

Perhaps you aren't, but there have been plenty of women who do engage in this type of behavior. Trust is earned in each relationship. Just because you think you're special and that should automatically qualify you for everyone you meet to get over their personal mental blocks about another person or situation does not make it so.

if you are a nice, respectful boy, I will be more than glad to jump your bones and possibly cook you delicious nom nom's because I'm cool like that

Sure, men like sex and food. But that's not all they look for dear. You seem to have a lot to learn.

But you have to do the dishes, because I don't want to fuck up my manicure.

So, a man telling you what to do is unacceptable, but you giving commands is perfectly legitimate when it comes down to something as needless as a manicure?

When your so-called jokes try to speak for women other than yourself, it crosses a line. Your jokes also perpetuate another variation of the female stereotype - that of the feminazi bitch. As a woman, I sure as hell don't want to be linked to you or your idea of a joke. How does posting this empower any female, or help close the divide of misogyny and misandry? It doesn't. It only worsens the situation.

News flash: jokes are a way to get ideas across, just like any other form of communication. Claiming something was a joke doesn't get you off the hook for taking responsibility for what you said.

I get your point, but the tone is unappreciated. Don't speak down to me. I'm not a child, and you are treating me as such. I don't appreciate when people "take it there" and that's exactly what you're doing.

I was not intending to speak down to you, I was only getting reasons for my own point of view across. I clearly just don't think that saying "Ha, it was a joke" is a license to say whatever you want. Humor is an awesome thing when it's presented in the right way. Your post wasn't presented in any way that made me initially think it was a joke, so I responded thusly. Also, if you don't want people to "take it there" then maybe you should seriously rethink what you are posting, as your writing directly engages people in to that type of response.

I think this happens because men and women value different things in a mate. Does any (hetero) woman want a broke ass lazy fool or a "scrub"? I want someone with ambition and drive to do well, which often, but not always, correlates with a decent paycheck. You'd think (hetero) men would value that too, but being pretty and nice seems to do it for a lot of them. Perhaps men think that being good-looking and having a nice personality should be enough, but if they held women to the same standards that women hold men, this wouldn't be a problem.

I disagree, women practice hypergamy, they will occasionally date equal, mainly up and very rarely down.

Feminists have been giving men dogs abuse for being attracted to women because of their looks for decades, and now the tables have been turned and female hypergamy is being brought to light. I apologize if you don't as a rule seek out equal or better, or are prepared to pay for a house and house husband and you are truly not hypergamous. If you are not, you are one of the exceptions. If you feel that discussing female objectification of money and status is misogyny, then surely by the same measure discussion of male objectification of beauty is misandry.

Also, if I said "men just want your vagina, and maybe your respect", would that also be misogny, if so what is it called when you say the same thing in reverse?

They are eyeroll-worthy for sure, but it actually comes from a specific comment on reddit (which I'm sure I'll never be able to find again). Like two weeks ago a guy said that women use child support to pay for salons and manicures.

Read the other comments, I didn't mean to insult you, but a lot of people didn't pick up on it.

I mean, I don't think the misogyny is a horrible life ending epidemic, but I respectfully disagree that it is on the same level as overzealous feminism. How often do you see generalizations by women in the comments? Me? Rarely. How many times do you see that done by men. Everyday. Literally every day I see somebody say something cruel and unthinking about women.

Also, dude, it's just a post on the internet. Not a master's thesis in gender dynamic based satire. I want to make people laugh, not make them drop their coffee cups and storm a local government building.

I'll be honest, quite often here in 2XC. It's tricky to point these situations out and not get jumped on because, frankly, there's an agenda with some people here and it doesn't always cohere with logic. (Which is perhaps comparable to sexist men and how they seem oblivious to the harm they cause others, whether emotional or physical in nature.)

But in the end, I guess we just have to say that we don't agree on the percentages being equal. I can live with that.

Not being mean or anything, but if you wanted to make people laugh with this, you should probably have opened with a really obvious one-liner that gets people wondering if it's on-the-level or not; that way, as they read through it, the narrative distrust builds until a realization occurs. It's too bad, because I'll admit there's some good material in here (the manicure part did make me laugh, even if I did roll my eyes).

Now, if you were trying to be elitist with your humor so that only a handful of people "get it" then I pretty much redact any and all criticism of your satirization. ;)

It's not a goddamn epidemic on Reddit anymore than overzealous feminism is.

Wrong. If we were to judge by Reddit comments, we would have to conclude that all men think women only want them in order to trick them out of their precious sperm and get supported while they sit on their asses all day. It is indeed pretty close to being an "epidemic".

While your rant was well-worded and quite expressive of the "modern independent woman", know that there are women who are just in it for the ring, the higher social status, and the money. Know that there are women who poke holes in condoms and use pregnancy as a way to "lock a good man down". And because there are women out there like this, and it just so happens a lot of men on Reddit have encountered said women, it makes sense there would be a lot of apprehension and reinforced stereotypes. Rock on for not being crazy and self-sufficient, but remember there are plenty of people who would love to find somebody and ride their comfy coattails.

Thanks for the links! I still feel birth control sabotage among men is very uncommon, with the exception of the abusive, controlling relationships described. Within the female population, though statistically it may be just as rare as men's birth control sabotage, it is heard about much more. Lesson for all: Don't stick your (insert genitalia here) in crazy. OR Don't promise crazy a baby.

Don't promise anybody a baby! Getting pregnant is hard for a lot of people! Or they change their mind, or a thousand other things. Setting yourself up for hearbreak with that one.

The honest truth is, it's sad to say but if something is predominant among abused women, then it's prominent in women period, because so many women are either emotionally or physically abused. I know anecdotes don't mean shit, but I can't think of at least three close friends off the top of my head who've been in abusive relationships, and I'm upper middle class, educated and white, which is not the typical "victim" identity people have for the abused in this country.